FreeDuck
 
  1  
Tue 18 Mar, 2008 07:32 am
sozobe wrote:
Anyone know WHEN the big speech will happen? I haven't found that yet.

I'm really thinking this'll be convention speech/Jefferson-Jackson speech big. He's writing it himself. Hoping to see it live.

Nervous.


Found this:
Quote:
An aide to Obama, whose speech will be delivered at a historic building across from Philadelphia's Liberty Bell at 10:15 a.m. EDT (1415 GMT), ...


Don't know which network you can find it on. I wish I brought my headphones to work so I could listen.
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Tue 18 Mar, 2008 07:37 am
Thank you!!

I hope CNN carries it but it's on now and I haven't seen anything about it.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Tue 18 Mar, 2008 07:40 am
soz said:
Quote:
It's possible it would have died down if he'd said nothing. He's going to revitalize the issue today though.


I don't think so, soz. He's stepped right into a rightwing minefield here involving racial fears/hatreds and violating central rightwing/conservative values of America = the Godly. It wouldn't have died down because everybody in the conservative media operations understood immediately how this could be used to smear by association. They haven't let up and they won't let up (see fox today, or any of the big rightwing sites today). We'll see this being carried right through the election and into his presidency if he gets there. This is the way these people operate because it works and because that's really as far as their 'ethics' expand.

The speech today, if it goes well and I think it will, can be counted on to influence coverage by the mainstream media at least temporarily. But just as the "he's a Muslim" smears continue to be purposefully originated and then circulated widely in the conservative universe, this won't go away in that same universe. David Brooks today, on a different matter (economics) says something true and relevant...
Quote:
As behavioral economists demonstrate every day, human beings are powerfully and unconsciously influenced by the ideas and assumptions that float around in the social ether.


After today's speech, the tact they had better take is to launch their own PR project re this preacher and reframe him and his message through quoting his pro-family, pro-responsibility, etc statements along with his military past (as a marine) etc.
0 Replies
 
Miller
 
  1  
Tue 18 Mar, 2008 07:43 am
Perhaps Michelle Robinson Obama will have something to add... Shocked
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Tue 18 Mar, 2008 07:59 am
revel said:
Quote:
and most of all the G_D America


There's no one here to convince of anything and those who need a change of mind on this aren't likely to allow such a change of mind. But this aspect is one that really pisses me off.

It isn't just that the protest arises out of a response which indicates nothing so much as pathological nationalism but also because this particular statement by Wright is understandable in two separate contexts.

First, it reflects the common uses of diads and triads in african american sermons..."He was born for us. And he was tempted by the devil for us. And then he died on the cross for us." It's a poetic or musical device in speech that lands well on our ears. You can see it in Churchill as well, used very effectively..."We shall fight on the beaches. We shall fight in the fields and streets. But we shall never give up." And in this case of Wright's speech, he used an oppositional diad... "Not God bless America. God damn America".

The second point it is that, from a viewpoint of traditional christian belief/theology with its message of mercy and agape and turning the other cheek, and "he who has not sinned" and "Thou shalt not kill" this case he makes that America has behaved in direct contradiction to these christian messages/commandments and thus deserves condemnation and damning is a theologically sound argument. The converse argument, that nationalist fervor trumps the christian injunctions, is the bastard argument.
0 Replies
 
Roxxxanne
 
  1  
Tue 18 Mar, 2008 08:02 am
MSNBC will carry the speech live.
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Tue 18 Mar, 2008 08:09 am
CNN too. "Awaiting senator's speech" as of now.

(Did I mention that I'm nervous? Three basic possibilities -- he turns off people who had been leaning towards him [think revel's dad]; he is basically reassuring but doesn't really change anything; or he knocks it out of the park. Obviously I'm hoping for the third, and think he's capable of it. I think the second may be more likely. Scared of the first.)
0 Replies
 
revel
 
  1  
Tue 18 Mar, 2008 08:22 am
blatham wrote:
revel said:
Quote:
and most of all the G_D America


There's no one here to convince of anything and those who need a change of mind on this aren't likely to allow such a change of mind. But this aspect is one that really pisses me off.

It isn't just that the protest arises out of a response which indicates nothing so much as pathological nationalism but also because this particular statement by Wright is understandable in two separate contexts.

First, it reflects the common uses of diads and triads in african american sermons..."He was born for us. And he was tempted by the devil for us. And then he died on the cross for us." It's a poetic or musical device in speech that lands well on our ears. You can see it in Churchill as well, used very effectively..."We shall fight on the beaches. We shall fight in the fields and streets. But we shall never give up." And in this case of Wright's speech, he used an oppositional diad... "Not God bless America. God damn America".

The second point it is that, from a viewpoint of traditional christian belief/theology with its message of mercy and agape and turning the other cheek, and "he who has not sinned" and "Thou shalt not kill" this case he makes that America has behaved in direct contradiction to these christian messages/commandments and thus deserves condemnation and damning is a theologically sound argument. The converse argument, that nationalist fervor trumps the christian injunctions, is the bastard argument.


Quote:
And in this case of Wright's speech, he used an oppositional diad... "Not God bless America. God damn America".


Perhaps you are right; I (and probably most people) just took it as a taking God's name in vain which anyone who knows anything about the commandments knows we are not to do. (those who believe) Still I don't think it is anybody's right to judge what God should damn, but this is getting into a theological discussion and I will just leave it at that. It is just what shocked me first when I heard about it all this.

On the whole I can see and agree with the point he was making but I thinks he took it too far and on the whole his sermons smack of reverse racism rather than trying to unite the racial divide. Obama has said he does not believe those sorts of divisive statements belong anywhere whether it is from a pulpit or a campaign stump (something like that)and I agree with him.
0 Replies
 
nappyheadedhohoho
 
  1  
Tue 18 Mar, 2008 08:22 am
Hillary must be giggling like a school girl. She's finally succeeded in making Obama the 'black' candidate.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Tue 18 Mar, 2008 08:26 am
Waiting on the speech now - 8:27 am MDT - Fox News will be carrying the speech in its entirety
0 Replies
 
Roxxxanne
 
  1  
Tue 18 Mar, 2008 08:27 am
sozobe wrote:
CNN too. "Awaiting senator's speech" as of now.

(Did I mention that I'm nervous? Three basic possibilities -- he turns off people who had been leaning towards him [think revel's dad]; he is basically reassuring but doesn't really change anything; or he knocks it out of the park. Obviously I'm hoping for the third, and think he's capable of it. I think the second may be more likely. Scared of the first.)


The bottom line is that if Obama can't defend himself aginst this, the first of many right-wing smear campaigns, he doesn't deserve to be president.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Tue 18 Mar, 2008 08:34 am
For rational folks, Sally Quinn reminds us of a relevant historical matter...

Quote:
And who can forget the Rev. Billy Graham's unfortunate conversations with Richard Nixon and H.R. Haldeman about the Jews? They made anti-Semitic jokes, talked about which reporters were Jewish and how reporting had deteriorated since more Jews had become journalists. Nixon complained (on tape) that the Jews had a "stranglehold on the country" and Billy Graham responded: "If you get elected a second time then we might be able to do something."

Billly Graham has been a spiritual adviser to our presidents for years, including Bill Clinton and our current President Bush but none of them has repudiated him.
http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/sally_quinn/2008/03/our_friends_and_their_views.html
0 Replies
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Tue 18 Mar, 2008 08:34 am
nappyheadedhohoho wrote:
Hillary must be giggling like a school girl. She's finally succeeded in making Obama the 'black' candidate.


how is it SHE succeeded?
0 Replies
 
Miller
 
  1  
Tue 18 Mar, 2008 08:36 am
Bi-Polar Bear wrote:
nappyheadedhohoho wrote:
Hillary must be giggling like a school girl. She's finally succeeded in making Obama the 'black' candidate.


how is it SHE succeeded?


I never viewed Obama as the WHITE candidate...
0 Replies
 
Miller
 
  1  
Tue 18 Mar, 2008 08:37 am
What's with all that nicotine gum Obama is constantly chewing? Cool
0 Replies
 
Miller
 
  1  
Tue 18 Mar, 2008 08:39 am
So...when's the speech begin? Cool
0 Replies
 
Roxxxanne
 
  1  
Tue 18 Mar, 2008 08:40 am
Quote:


tpm.com
0 Replies
 
Miller
 
  1  
Tue 18 Mar, 2008 08:41 am
Why didn't Obama join the Catholic Church? Cool
0 Replies
 
Roxxxanne
 
  1  
Tue 18 Mar, 2008 08:43 am
Entire Text of Speech

Snip:

"We the people, in order to form a more perfect union."

Two hundred and twenty one years ago, in a hall that still stands across the street, a group of men gathered and, with these simple words, launched America's improbable experiment in democracy. Farmers and scholars; statesmen and patriots who had traveled across an ocean to escape tyranny and persecution finally made real their declaration of independence at a Philadelphia convention that lasted through the spring of 1787.

The document they produced was eventually signed but ultimately unfinished. It was stained by this nation's original sin of slavery, a question that divided the colonies and brought the convention to a stalemate until the founders chose to allow the slave trade to continue for at least twenty more years, and to leave any final resolution to future generations.

Of course, the answer to the slavery question was already embedded within our Constitution - a Constitution that had at is very core the ideal of equal citizenship under the law; a Constitution that promised its people liberty, and justice, and a union that could be and should be perfected over time.

And yet words on a parchment would not be enough to deliver slaves from bondage, or provide men and women of every color and creed their full rights and obligations as citizens of the United States. What would be needed were Americans in successive generations who were willing to do their part - through protests and struggle, on the streets and in the courts, through a civil war and civil disobedience and always at great risk - to narrow that gap between the promise of our ideals and the reality of their time.

This was one of the tasks we set forth at the beginning of this campaign - to continue the long march of those who came before us, a march for a more just, more equal, more free, more caring and more prosperous America. I chose to run for the presidency at this moment in history because I believe deeply that we cannot solve the challenges of our time unless we solve them together - unless we perfect our union by understanding that we may have different stories, but we hold common hopes; that we may not look the same and we may not have come from the same place, but we all want to move in the same direction - towards a better future for of children and our grandchildren.

This belief comes from my unyielding faith in the decency and generosity of the American people. But it also comes from my own American story.

I am the son of a black man from Kenya and a white woman from Kansas. I was raised with the help of a white grandfather who survived a Depression to serve in Patton's Army during World War II and a white grandmother who worked on a bomber assembly line at Fort Leavenworth while he was overseas. I've gone to some of the best schools in America and lived in one of the world's poorest nations. I am married to a black American who carries within her the blood of slaves and slaveowners - an inheritance we pass on to our two precious daughters. I have brothers, sisters, nieces, nephews, uncles and cousins, of every race and every hue, scattered across three continents, and for as long as I live, I will never forget that in no other country on Earth is my story even possible.

It's a story that hasn't made me the most conventional candidate. But it is a story that has seared into my genetic makeup the idea that this nation is more than the sum of its parts - that out of many, we are truly one.

Throughout the first year of this campaign, against all predictions to the contrary, we saw how hungry the American people were for this message of unity. Despite the temptation to view my candidacy through a purely racial lens, we won commanding victories in states with some of the whitest populations in the country. In South Carolina, where the Confederate Flag still flies, we built a powerful coalition of African Americans and white Americans.

This is not to say that race has not been an issue in the campaign. At various stages in the campaign, some commentators have deemed me either "too black" or "not black enough." We saw racial tensions bubble to the surface during the week before the South Carolina primary. The press has scoured every exit poll for the latest evidence of racial polarization, not just in terms of white and black, but black and brown as well.

And yet, it has only been in the last couple of weeks that the discussion of race in this campaign has taken a particularly divisive turn.

On one end of the spectrum, we've heard the implication that my candidacy is somehow an exercise in affirmative action; that it's based solely on the desire of wide-eyed liberals to purchase racial reconciliation on the cheap. On the other end, we've heard my former pastor, Reverend Jeremiah Wright, use incendiary language to express views that have the potential not only to widen the racial divide, but views that denigrate both the greatness and the goodness of our nation; that rightly offend white and black alike.

I have already condemned, in unequivocal terms...
0 Replies
 
Roxxxanne
 
  1  
Tue 18 Mar, 2008 08:45 am
Obama is about to hit this one out of the park based on what I just read...
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

So....Will Biden Be VP? - Question by blueveinedthrobber
My view on Obama - Discussion by McGentrix
Obama/ Love Him or Hate Him, We've Got Him - Discussion by Phoenix32890
Obama fumbles at Faith Forum - Discussion by slkshock7
Expert: Obama is not the antichrist - Discussion by joefromchicago
Obama's State of the Union - Discussion by maxdancona
Obama 2012? - Discussion by snood
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Obama '08?
  3. » Page 626
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.18 seconds on 04/19/2025 at 07:33:04